Re: excellent article on global warming

On Sun, 3 May 2009 08:34:28 -0700, "Bob Eld" <nsmontassoc@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:49FD0B5A.4E35F55B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Some REAL science at last, notably illustrating that the effect of CO2
in the atmosphere is nearly already at saturation level and more can
contribute very little to temperature rise.

Graham

http://brneurosci.org/co2.html

" The 255K data point is not just zero CO2, it is zero water vapor as
well. In reality, there would always be some water vapor present, even
if there were no CO2. This means that the actual temperature for zero
CO2 would be higher than 255K, which would change the shape of the
curve. For example, if the CO2=0 value was 271 (halfway between 255 and
the current temperature), the prediction changes to 288.55K, or about a
1.39 degree increase for doubling of CO2. This can be seen in the blue
curve (see enlarged graph below). The result is not much different than
the 1.76, but the important point is that as the estimates become more
realistic, the predicted temperature does not increase, but decreases
slightly. "

Clearly incomplete bunk that does not explain the total mechanisms,
otherwise how do you explain Venus or that the earth as a whole was much
warmer during the pliocene? One paper by some nut does not a theory make.

If we accept the saturation theory, how does that correlate to temperature?
I see a couple of equations, but no or proof of same, just a "pull it out
of your ass" graph. Furthermore what is the effect of methane and other GW
gases?

In the mean time the Arctic, Greenland and the Antarctic keep melting and
ice breaking up. Explain that. Me thinks you are "out to lunch."

He is.

The first modern peer-reviewed paper trying to determine of more
atmospheric CO2 would have a significant was, "Atmospheric Carbon
Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate,"
by Rasool and Schneider, published in Science, New Series, Vol. 173,
No. 3992 (July 9, 1971), 138-141. I've a copy, if interested. That
paper pretty much agrees with Graham's conclusions, but it was written
in 1971, used a highly simplified one dimensional model, and others
quickly found several serious errors -- as did the authors themselves,
which they added to the pile. By 1972, the paper was disproven. In
1975, Schneider went further and demonstrated through another peer
reviewed paper that CO2 was indeed not saturated, as his earlier paper
had suggested.

Graham hasn't read or understood any of the developments.

Radiation physics through the atmosphere is pretty well understood,
now. Subsequent work using line-by-line calculations (which is the
gold standard of radiation transfer modeling) and using the latest
emission spectra (MODTRAN and HITRAN) and with realistic atmospheric
conditions (pressure, temperature, water vapor etc.) clearly show that
while the center of the 15 micron band is saturated, the edges of that
band are not, and there are enough secondary bands to cause a
significant increase in absorption as you increase CO2. There is also
an impact on the effective altitude for CO2 radiation into space.

The IPCC TAR and AR4 publish a simplified, logarithmic approximation
for these effects. Myrhe and Myrhe, 2001, discuss some details.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/06/a-saturated-gassy-argument
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/06/a-saturated-gassy-argument-part-ii
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/Radmath.htm
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/ClimateBook/ClimateVol1.pdf
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/ClimateBook/ClimateWorkbook.pdf
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/hitran/

Jon
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Theories which were once supported by a consensus of scientists
    ... temperature is the reasonable and expected result of increasing ... atmospheric CO2 levels based on the known physical properties of CO2 ... of the atmosphere it is absurd to suggest that this is signficant. ... The IPCC itself admitted, begrudgingly, that the computer models are ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Is Global Warming Caused By Man?
    ... the public to accept the idea that the release of greenhouse gases, ... CO2, has resulted in an inexorable rise in the surface temperature of the ... second pair of curves shows the CO2 content of the atmosphere and the arctic ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Romneys energy plan promotes fossil fuels, dismisses solar, wind
    ... to the concept that an atmosphere, any atmosphere, modulates, ... the temperature extrems between the solar illuminated ... do such a good job (less gravity> less CO2}. ... let's begin with a basic primer on the greenhouse effect due to CO2. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Theories which were once supported by a consensus of scientists
    ... temperature is the reasonable and expected result of increasing ... atmospheric CO2 levels based on the known physical properties of CO2 ... of the atmosphere it is absurd to suggest that this is signficant. ... greenhouse gas, but clouds as opposed to water vapor not in clouds, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Is Global Warming Caused By Man?
    ... This changes the composite of the atmosphere sice 1870. ... CO2, has resulted in an inexorable rise in the surface temperature of the ... The first pair of curves shows artic temperatures over the 130 year ...
    (sci.physics.particle)